What are best ways to educate a skeptic?

Bottom line we are in a dirty state of knowledge. We can't confirm or deny that Aliens are visiting us. There are just a many reasons for the Gov't
to hide the knowledge of Aliens as for them to encourage and spread the word of a fake Alien controlled UFO.

The facts as I see them.
1. Its mathematically and scientifically impossible for us to be the only life in the universe.
2. Our government has intentionally lied to us in the past. Whether it was for the greater good or not doesn't matter or change the fact that they
have purposely lied to us.

Now that certain things have been declassified it is confirmed that certain early 'UFO' cases were in fact flights of unacknowledged aircraft or
spacecraft, e.g. U-2 or CORONA. Presumably there are many others still classified.

3. Knowledge is power.

So from those three facts I can conclude that its possible for Aliens to be visiting us and for our government to be hiding it.

If Aliens are visiting, it may be the case that the governments are hiding it. If Aliens are visiting, it is certain that Aliens are hiding it. They
bear primary responsibility, right?

However, I can also conclude that it would also be in the best interest of our government to maintain the element of surprise and power by ensuring
that our latest technology is not discovered by our enemies.

What if some of the enemies aren't on Earth?

It would also be in the best interest of our goverment for the general public in our country and more importantly for our enemies to believe
and speculate on Alien visitors in the event they spot one of our objects.

Originally posted by Jaellma
Usually when discussing the topic of UFOs and aliens, most people are open to the idea of life outside of our planet earth and the possibility of us
being visited by beings from other places, whether extraterrestrial or inter/extra dimensional. In other cases, some people find it hard to believe
any of these things.

This has probably been discussed here before but I would like to know the best way to deal with a person who is a skeptic but appears to have some
level of interest in knowing what's out there. What some or evidence or articles are available for the hard core skeptic to help sway their
thinking? There are many points of reference out there but unfortunately many are not credible enough or are tainted.

Thoughts please?

There's probably no bigger skeptic on this forum or in the world than myself. When I first joined ATS my handle was SkepticalEd but because of just
the name I got a lot of heat from those of less intelligence. Only skeptics understand each other and no one that isn't a skeptic can answer your
request.

To put it plainly, there are believers and there are skeptics NOT non-believers. A believer doesn't require evidence, they accept whatever is
proposed blindly and will support the claimant. A skeptic simply requires evidence before accepting a claim.

That said, I am a skeptic but I accept the reality of UFOs as the evidence is overwhelming. And since I've had 5 or 6 sightings and videotaped one,
there is no argument. The believers accept tales, the skeptics haven't had the experience.

Now for aliens. There is no irrefutable evidence for the reality of aliens and I'm not going to accept the tales of others, I have to experience it.
You can say that there are x amount of planets that may have life. You can quote the Drake Equation. To me it's all immaterial. No one knows if
there is life outside of planet Earth and speculating and assuming is empty air. No one knows anything about UFOs except that they exist. No one
knows where they originate from. All we have about UFOs is speculation since they cannot be researched. Tales of alien abductions are a joke and no
one has ever been able to offer any irrefutable evidence of their reality. Hypnosis, "implants" are all useless and prove nothing.

UFOs exist and they have been and continue to be only one thing, a mystery.

To my knowlege (as a believer), there is no proof yet. Belief is only a matter of faith or experience. Not because of pictures and
stories.

The real question is, why do you believe?

Actually the real question should be "do you believe in aliens or do you believe in UFOs? I think is is sooo much easier to believe in UFOs because
many, many people have witnessed UFOs. Not too many people can say they have seen an Alien, and if they have no one has stepped forward to the masses
with absolute proof.

To put it plainly, there are believers and there are skeptics NOT non-believers. A believer doesn't require evidence, they accept whatever is
proposed blindly and will support the claimant. A skeptic simply requires evidence before accepting a claim.

That said, I am a skeptic but I accept the reality of UFOs as the evidence is overwhelming. And since I've had 5 or 6 sightings and videotaped one,
there is no argument. The believers accept tales, the skeptics haven't had the experience

What exactly is "evidence" to you? Do you have to feel and touch it or if you have read about it or seen it, is that not enough?

I guess I don't understand what would take you from being a skeptic who has seen things and are still a skeptic to a person who has seen and or
experienced something to make you a non-skeptic. Does that make sense?

Does this make you an eternal skeptic who doesn't believe in anything regardless of what you witness? What would make you go beyond this?

To put it plainly, there are believers and there are skeptics NOT non-believers. A believer doesn't require evidence, they accept whatever is
proposed blindly and will support the claimant. A skeptic simply requires evidence before accepting a claim.

That said, I am a skeptic but I accept the reality of UFOs as the evidence is overwhelming. And since I've had 5 or 6 sightings and videotaped one,
there is no argument. The believers accept tales, the skeptics haven't had the experience

What exactly is "evidence" to you? Do you have to feel and touch it or if you have read about it or seen it, is that not enough?

I guess I don't understand what would take you from being a skeptic who has seen things and are still a skeptic to a person who has seen and or
experienced something to make you a non-skeptic. Does that make sense?

Does this make you an eternal skeptic who doesn't believe in anything regardless of what you witness? What would make you go beyond this?

Your questions, while fair, indicate that skeptics cannot be explained in simple terms. Believers can be explained simply with the fact that to be a
believer you have to be mentally conditioned for mental conditioning results in beliefs.

Being a skeptic is being a real normal human. We are not born believers for to be a believers requires the mental conditioning that starts with
believing and especially religious parents and continues through religious training and continues to the present with reinforcement from many sources
especially television.

A skeptic, being a normal person and not being mentally conditioned, can have experiences that result in acceptance yet still be a skeptic of
unfounded claims. One doesn't stop being a skeptic since being so is normal.

I could never be a believer because I've studied hypnosis, became good at it and from that became involved in learning what makes humans tick. I
can't remember ever being a believer and he realization that mental conditioning results in beliefs and I have never been mentally conditioned. I do
not use words such as I believe or I don't believe. I simply know or do not know. I don't accept tales. I'll listen intently but I don't accept
whatever is being claimed.

When I became interested in UFOlogy in 1957 I didn't believe in UFOs simply because of reports. I was curious as to what it was that people were
experiencing, knowing full well that most of the reports I read of or heard about were coming from believers who were just passing them on. When I
had my first sighting I became a knower, an accepter and beliefs never entered into the picture.

Not all skeptics are created equal for there are skeptics who believe. They may be skeptical about UFOs and aliens but they'll still have a belief
system.

And evidence is just that, evidence, proof, not hearsay. The majority of humans have a propensity to accept blindly because they don't realize
they're operating under a system where evidence is sort of like a foreign concept. But those that deal with evidence such as lawyers, scientists,
etc., don't accept blindly for accepting blindly does not result in certainty.

Again, being a skeptic is normal. Being a believer is not normal. Cult deprogrammers do not "cure" skeptics, they "cure" believers. My favorite
saying is, and sometimes it is my signature: You cannot have a cult of individuals.

If they don't accept the programming we can setup them up to be probed by the TSA, that should convince them that non intelligent alien lifeforms
have penetrated the ranks of government goon squads.. and give them some insight into alien abduction in the early years..

If someone is freaking out over some light in the sky they never noticed before, and I come along and tell them, for a fact, it's Jupiter, and 20
dozen other people will also come along and back me up that it is indeed Jupiter, who's doing the educating?

It would seem the more educated someone is about what goes on in the sky, and how to identify what's what for what it actually is, the LESS likely
they are to ever see a UFO.

Many skeptics, like myself, are skeptics because we've been doing this a very long time, and near every single sensational bit of evidence has been
proven to be either outright hoax, or misidentification, or have associations with all the red flags that are fairly well known in association with
hoaxes and charlatans.

MUFON has well over 50 years of paper stacked up. 50 years from now, they'll have another 50 years of paper stacked up.

There are a few decent cases, but, none of these cases are ever absolute proof. Circumstantial evidence is not evidence for conviction, though it is
quite interesting.

From a statistics, due to the sheer size and age of the universe, there's no doubt there's life somewhere else, and a high probability that there is
indeed intelligent and highly advanced life.
The other side of that, however, due to the very same vast scale and age of the universe that makes it a near statistical impossibility for life to
NOT exist elsewhere, makes it highly improbable that any advanced, intelligent life is visiting, or has ever visited us.
The distances involved in the sheer boggling scale of the universe make for a high improbability of contact from anyone else.

If you really want to convince me, bring me an alien to talk to.

I volunteer to be abducted by ANY aliens species. Bring it. PLEASE.

Show me a real UFO (not some ambiguous blob of badly recorded light).

Get one of these people that are claiming they know how to design and build a UFO (one forum topic currently active that I know of), alien spacecraft,
transport interface, or whatever they're calling it, LIKE THIS GUY to actually DO IT,
instead of giving us little squirts of feel good air up the skirt that never amounts to anything ever except a bunch of fancy drawings with fun
technobabble that can't and won't ever be proved.

Originally posted by nineix
I'm coming in late on this.
I'm a skeptic. Educate me? How?
....
From a statistics, due to the sheer size and age of the universe, there's no doubt there's life somewhere else, and a high probability that there is
indeed intelligent and highly advanced life.
The other side of that, however, due to the very same vast scale and age of the universe that makes it a near statistical impossibility for life to
NOT exist elsewhere, makes it highly improbable that any advanced, intelligent life is visiting, or has ever visited us.
The distances involved in the sheer boggling scale of the universe make for a high improbability of contact from anyone else.

Fermi was wrong when he said they SHOULD be here by now? How do you dispute his math? On what basis do you dismiss the possibility of the slow and
gradual expansion of life that he spoke of? Yes, the distances are huge, as you say. Of course. But the time periods involved are correspondingly
huge. Out of necessity.

I think most skeptics are every bit as educated as believers, but require a better standard of evidence in order to be convinced. As a skeptic
myself, I don't think that evidence exists, and reading the threads on this forum that are supposed to offer proof only strengthens my confidence in
that.

I consider myself open minded and really do want to believe, and I readily admit some incidents, like the Tehran incident, the o'Hare airport
incident, and Rendlesham Forest really leave me scratching my head for an explanation.

I think believers, however, are more easily able to jump from "wow, I have no idea what caused that" to "aliens are visiting us", and that is a
jump I have not been able to make.

I keep in touch with the evidence out there for the ET hypothesis, though, and I'm currently working my way through "UFO's by Leslie Kean", but
still, all I can see is things we cannot easily explain, rather than proof of aliens or anything else.

From a statistics, due to the sheer size and age of the universe, there's no doubt there's life somewhere else, and a high probability
that there is indeed intelligent and highly advanced life.
The other side of that, however, due to the very same vast scale and age of the universe that makes it a near statistical impossibility for life to
NOT exist elsewhere, makes it highly improbable that any advanced, intelligent life is visiting, or has ever visited us.
The distances involved in the sheer boggling scale of the universe make for a high improbability of contact from anyone else.

I hear what you are saying and respect your view but this is where I disagree with you. I think it is also highly improbable for any advanced,
intelligent life to NOT visit us since there are unknown number of ways they can reach us. SCALE. AGE. TIME. DISTANCE = all man made parameters. We
do not know what mechanisms entities would use to visit this planet. For all we know they could be using dimensions to jump here and not scale as you
are intimating.

In any case it is my opinion we know very little of how things operate. One thing is certain, UFOs exist. Whether they are man-made, terrestrial
non-human entities, non-terrestrial entities, sub-terrestrial or just atmospheric entities, they are seen and have been seen by man for eons.

I have seen them in the jungle and I had to ask my logical mind what the hell is a craft-like object doing in such a remote location. Found out from
the local old-timers visitations and appearances of those objects were known for many many generations but they usually saw them from a distance as
the discreet objects used high foliage for cover and lagoons for entry/exit. So, government/man-made objects? Maybe but not-likely in all cases.
Logic screams of disparate possibilities.

I have experiences and credible stories to bolster my belief system. Hopefully one day we will know more about our visitors.

I consider myself open minded and really do want to believe, and I readily admit some incidents, like the Tehran incident, the o'Hare airport
incident, and Rendlesham Forest really leave me scratching my head for an explanation.

I think believers, however, are more easily able to jump from "wow, I have no idea what caused that" to "aliens are visiting us", and that is a
jump I have not been able to make.

I keep in touch with the evidence out there for the ET hypothesis, though, and I'm currently working my way through "UFO's by Leslie Kean", but
still, all I can see is things we cannot easily explain, rather than proof of aliens or anything else.

I guess you have to ask yourself, are these hundreds and thousands of eye-witnesses, scientists, pilots, etc telling the truth, or at least some
semblance of the truth? If folks have been saying the same thing for thousands of years, is there some possibility these are truly unexplained
phenomenon?

Leslie Kean does a great job in laying out the stories, as told by the most credible witnesses. Other mind-bending UFO stories concern the Colares
Incident, the Varginha Case, the Peruvian case where Oscar Huertas, pilot, shoots at a UFO with multiple rounds but does no visible damage to the
craft. What are these things? Mainstream Ufology barely cover these foreign cases but IMO these ones leave me scratching my head the most.

Originally posted by nineix
I'm coming in late on this.
I'm a skeptic. Educate me? How?
....
From a statistics, due to the sheer size and age of the universe, there's no doubt there's life somewhere else, and a high probability that there is
indeed intelligent and highly advanced life.
The other side of that, however, due to the very same vast scale and age of the universe that makes it a near statistical impossibility for life to
NOT exist elsewhere, makes it highly improbable that any advanced, intelligent life is visiting, or has ever visited us.
The distances involved in the sheer boggling scale of the universe make for a high improbability of contact from anyone else.

Fermi was wrong when he said they SHOULD be here by now? How do you dispute his math? On what basis do you dismiss the possibility of the slow and
gradual expansion of life that he spoke of? Yes, the distances are huge, as you say. Of course. But the time periods involved are correspondingly
huge. Out of necessity.

So again, where is the flaw in Fermi's calculations?

And now we get into the Panspermia debate.
I don't dispute the possibility or probability of panspermia, that we and all life on Earth are aliens.

I won't even dispute the fractional speculative possibility that somewhere in the well of time, due to the overwhelmingly huge spans involved that
there might even be a sliver of meat that Australopithecus or some other ancestor got their DNA tinkered with by some chance discovery of a drive-by
space faring intelligent culture.
It's improbable, but, I'll grant that 'improbable' does not mean 'impossible'.

All this other noise about Andromeda councils, hug a rainbow, raise your vibrations, 57 dozen different types of aliens species coming to visit and
zipping around, Annunaki on the moon, Annunaki on Mars, Phobos is a hollow space ship, our moon is a hollow space ship, Sexy hot blonde Pleiedians
visiting one-armed Swedish farmers because he's the reincarnation of the Jeebus, and the scores of hundreds of thousands of other stuff that's just
total attention wh*%ing fiction, is all just totally ridiculous.

As said before; I volunteer to be abducted by any alien species. BRING IT.

I would love to meet me some aliens. I'd love to just see a nifty craft. I've watched the skies since I was a kid. I've seen Halley's Comet,
other comets, meteor showers, brilliant bolides, Space Lab, Mir, ISS, other satellites, solar and lunar eclipses several times, all sorts of different
and strange (but conventional) aircraft, blimps, weather balloons, passenger balloons, strange clouds, plus all sorts of different kinds of lightning
and other atmospheric phenomena.

There's plenty fantastic strange wonderful stuff that goes on overhead in the sky, but, it's nothing to get all crazy haired about.
I've watched the skies all my life; seen all the things described and have never, not once, seen anything that could be classified as a UFO.

I'd love to see one.
As said, I volunteer for abduction.
If the 'aliens' are as whammo whiz bang advanced as peeps claim they are, they can easily 2600 all over this post and find me.

I can understand how you feel. I felt the same way too watching the skies in North America and seeing things that I really couldn't classify as
UFO but until I saw two separate ones in the remote areas of Central America, it changed my thinking.

In one instance, I was with several folks hanging out talking outside a home when a huge orangeish light (size of a large bus, maybe?) zoomed down to
the nearby ball-field and hovered for a while then started moving across the field like it was looking for something. Mind you, this was close to 1 am
in the morning, remote extremely rural area, it emitted a blue thin searchlight on the field and after a while, shot up like a dart and out of sight.
Not a sound from this object and the field was no more than 200 yards away. Needless to say,everyone there was speechless but again, like you said you
would have to experience something like that to start thinking differently.

Just some of my experiences. Hopefully some day you get to experience something like this. I believe if I had seen something like this on the West
Coast in the US, I would have brushed it off as nothing but the venue where it happened and other local folks soberly talking of generations of
occurrences have left me scratching my head.

Originally posted by Gazrok
...
Interstellar travel basically requires there to be some kind of way around the light speed barrier we believe exists, and for many, that's simply a
BIG leap they aren't ready to make yet.
...

Even if there is no way to travel between two stars faster than light, we should remember that aliens might have a much more patient approach to space
exploration.

(1) Alien life spans might be much longer. Think of how long a Redwood tree lives. Also consider that medicine is improving human life spans. I
wouldn't be surprised if the average human could live 200 years or more by the next century.

(2) There are 136 stars within 20 light years of Earth. At 10% of the speed of light, unmanned probes could reach all those stars within 200
years.

(3) Aliens might have a more communal attitude towards investment where each generation reaps the fruits of previous generations and plants seeds for
future generations. Even human society was more like this until the modern age. People used to plant forests and orchards with those thoughts in
mind.

(4) The humanoids people see around UFOs are not necessarily aliens that embarked at their home world and arrived here at Earth. They might be
androids. Or they might be aliens born on Earth from frozen alien embryos.

So I don't think the light speed barrier is an issue. Someday humans will send probes to nearby stars. We might even colonize another planet
orbiting a nearby star if the environment is hospitable enough that we could send frozen embryos with some android nannies to start a
colony.

best way to educate a skeptic would be....2 ways:
1. educate yourself to be a skeptic, and keep beliefs private
or
2. beat them to a pulp and keep beating on them until they admit to anything.
hey thats what the dark ages were about, so its know to work. fact.

Skeptics are skeptical because the "proof" often given by certain kinds of people is not really proof, but rather hair-rising speculation or wishful
thinking.

You cannot expect showing someone a video of a blurry light on a pitch black background together with your opinion "it is clearly some kind of
intelligently controlled craft" (etc...)...and demand that the skeptical person shares the same BELIEF as you do.

So..start with better evidence and proof, eliminate the 85% of proof which is only speculative thinking and beliefs...and start WITH THE FACTS. And
once your way of producing evidence and proof becomes better, the better the chances to convince a skeptic.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.